Office of the Historian

941.523/7–2854

No. 243
Memorandum of Telephone Conversation, by the Director of the Office of Chinese Affairs (McConaughy)

confidential
[Washington,] July 28, 1954.

Subject:

  • Delivery of U.S. Protests1 to Chinese Communists re Plane Incidents near Hainan Island

Participants:

  • Michael Joy, First Secretary, British Embassy
  • Walter P. McConaughy, Director, Office of Chinese Affairs

Mr. Joy of the British Embassy telephoned me this afternoon to report that a message had just been received from Trevelyan, the British Chargé at Peiping, reporting that he had delivered the American protests to Chang Han-fu, Chinese Communist Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs at 5 PM, July 28, Peiping time.

Trevelyan reported that both U.S. protests were rejected by Chang Han-fu.2 He quoted Chang Han-fu as saying that as to the first protest, the shooting down of the Cathay Pacific airplane was solely a matter between his Government and the British Government, [Page 511] and was being settled by those two Governments exclusively. He denied the right of any third government to intervene.

As to the second protest, Chang Han-fu said that the American version of the engagement between U.S. Naval planes and Chinese Communist fighter planes was incorrect. Chang Han-fu referred to the account released by the New China News Agency on July 27.3 He said that the circumstances were correctly set forth in this statement and that his Government would stand by it. Chang Han-fu gave Trevelyan a copy of the New China News Agency press release.

Trevelyan told Chang Han-fu he would transmit this document and the substance of Chang Han-fu’s reply.

Mr. Joy promised to send us copies of the two aide-mémoires which Trevelyan delivered to Chang Han-fu.4

  1. The text of two U.S. aide-mémoires, one protesting the attack on the British airliner and demanding compensation for the victims and families of the deceased and one protesting the attack on the U.S. planes, may be found in Department of State Bulletin, Aug. 9, 1954, pp. 196–197; they are incorrectly printed as if they constituted a single document.↩
  2. Telegram 504 from London, July 28, reported that Trevelyan had left the aide-mémoires at the Chinese Foreign Ministry but that later that day they had been handed to a member of his staff with the statement that Trevelyan had forgotten to take them with him. (941.523/7–2854) The incident is described in Humphrey Trevelyan, Living With the Communists: China, 1953–5; Soviet Union, 1962–5 (Boston, Gambit, 1971), pp. 110–111.↩
  3. A statement issued on July 27 by Chang Han-fu and released by the New China News Agency on that date charged that U.S. planes had invaded Chinese air space above Hainan, had attacked and shot down two Chinese “patrol aircraft”, and had strafed two Polish merchant ships and a Chinese escort vessel; the text of the release is printed in Survey of China Mainland Press, July 28, 1954.↩
  4. Copies are filed with a letter of July 28 from Joy to McConaughy. (941.523/7–2854) A third U.S. communication, again protesting the attack on the British airliner and demanding compensation for the victims and families of the deceased, was delivered to the Chinese Foreign Ministry by Trevelyan on Aug. 4; for text, see Department of State Bulletin, Aug. 16, 1954, pp. 241–242. Telegram 631 from London, Aug. 5, reported that the U.S. protest had been returned with a covering note reiterating the Chinese position that the incident concerned only the Chinese and British Governments. (293.1141/8–554) Despatch 1263 from London, Nov. 2, reported that on Sept. 15, the British had submitted to the Chinese a claim for compensation totalling 367,000 pounds for all losses incurred during the incident and that on Oct. 23, the Chinese had accepted this figure; Americans with claims were to be invited to submit them to the British Government. (293.1141/11–254)↩